Hot Take: Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test Doesn’t Matter Because She Identifies As Native American

There have been plenty of hot takes in attempting to defend Elizabeth Warren and her claims of Native American ancestry, but this is 2018, so you get things like this from Alondra Nelson, president of the Social Science Research Council and a professor of sociology at Columbia

Elizabeth Warren and the Folly of Genetic Ancestry Tests

This week, Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts announced that geneticists had analyzed her DNA and proved her longstanding claim that she has Native American ancestry. Senator Warren had caved in to months of ridicule by President Trump, who mocked her using a racist term and ultimately refused to believe her “useless” DNA test.

The question is not whether her DNA analysis is accurate. It’s whether it can tell us anything meaningful about identity. The truth is that sets of DNA markers cannot tell us who we really are because genetic data is technical and identity is social. The science in question is a form of chromosome mapping similar to that used in the billion-dollar genetic ancestry testing industry in the United States. That testing draws on incomplete data about human genetic diversity.

In this case, the “reference set” included samples drawn from 37 people “from across the Americas with Native American ancestry.” Nevertheless, this genetic analysis did locate five chromosome segments that strongly suggest indigenous ancestry. In his report, the geneticist Carlos Bustamante of Stanford University cautioned that it did not “provide complete coverage of all Native American groups.” This is a limitation of the technology, but it also has political implications.

Indigenous communities have long engaged in a “politics of refusal,” according to a Mohawk anthropologist, Audra Simpson. They have opted out of research and commercial endeavors that seek to assemble genetic samples of their communities. And they refuse to support practices that reduce Native American ancestry, culture and history to mere segments of DNA. Tribal sovereignty and indigenous authority determine membership and indigenous understandings of community.

Senator Warren’s genetic-ancestry results suggest she has a Native American ancestor, most likely more than six generations back. But a few segments of a person’s genome that indicate she may have indigenous ancestry does not make her Native American. To be Native American is to be a member of a tribal community and recognized by that community as such. DNA cannot vouchsafe tribal identity or any other community affiliation.

Well, in that case, Warren’s claims are fraudulent, as no Native America groups are providing membership to Fauxahontas.

When we’re faced with difficult issues about the past that bear on the present, it is tempting to take these tests as proof of identity. But these genetic tests cannot confirm social dynamics. Identity is socially, politically and legally determined, even if shaped by genetics. Yet, genetic ancestry testing does not offer insights about these dynamics. So we can’t look to DNA to settle debates about identity.

In all fairness, if Prof. Nelson is attempting to defend Senator Warren, she’s not doing a very good job. But this is less about actually defending Warren than it is about propping up the notion of Identity. This is how we get nutters believing they are the opposite biological sex, and saying they are black when they clearly aren’t. How you get a “trans man” identifying as a dog.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

46 Responses to “Hot Take: Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test Doesn’t Matter Because She Identifies As Native American”

  1. Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

    Dances With Lies

    https://tinyurl.com/y7cz9d8o

    https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

  2. Jethro says:

    And why do Cons care so much? Because it’s another opportunity to mock and ridicule an opponent, at the expense of a minority. Classic Con.

    Senator Warren claimed to have Native American ancestors based on family lore. She did NOT use this claim for any job advantage. It turns out she DOES have Native American ancestors, proven by DNA analysis.

    Sounds like the Cons should just quietly eat their crow and move on to the next target of hate. And that tRump should be writing a check.

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      She did NOT use this claim for any job advantage. It turns out she DOES have Native American ancestors, proven by DNA analysis.

      Uh,but she DID.
      And nothing was proven by DNA …err… analysis.

      Try to keep up, little fella, or are you just naturally obtuse?
      Or maybe you’re just as big a liar as she, huh, soldier?
      https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • Mangoldielocks says:

      Why do dems cares so much about sex? Or trumps taxes? Or Trumps orange skin? Why do dems slander Melania. An immigrant and a woman. Or bash his young son? What happened to Blasey Ford? Does anyone on your side even care what happened to her now that she failed to prevent Kavanaugh from being installed on the Supreme court.

      Why does the left go after a Black man who likes Trump? Kanye West was actually called Trumps TOKEN NEGRO by CNN. Seriously. If the right said something like this the world would erupt into chaos.

      We care because she lied to get ahead. Claiming she was a native American to land a teaching gig at Harvard. See here is the deal. Why do you defend these people from DEEP DEEP blue states. If they go down for being douche bag liars you can easily fill their seat with another DEM and not skip a beat.

      And why do Cons care so much? Because it’s another opportunity to mock and ridicule an opponent, at the expense of a minority. Classic Con.

      Seriously. She is NOT a MINORITY. LOLOLOLOL. You are probably more of a minority than she is. At the expense of a minority what hog wash, trolling on your part.

      But yes she has aspirations of running for the White House. Another establishment wall street puppet pretending to be a progressive. Pandering to her base. YOu see the mainstream Democrats are not into all this PC and SJW bs being bandied about by the progressive minions ruling the party.

      A poll taken among democrats show that 1/3 want Biden to run for president. Biden is about as establishment as they come which pretty much sums up the belief that the Democratic party is now well over 50 percent Turd Sandwich…er I mean Democratic Socialists.

      • Jethro says:

        We care because she lied to get ahead. Claiming she was a native American to land a teaching gig at Harvard.

        That’s a white-wing myth. Didn’t happen. But your cloistered existence prevents truth or facts from influencing you.

        As we’ve stated many times before, much of what NuCons believe to be true, is not.

        She is NOT a MINORITY.

        We’re sorry you didn’t understand. The minority is Native Americans, not Senator Warren. Your talk of “Pocahontas” and “Fauxcahontas” is demeaning to them.

        • liljeffyatemypuppy says:

          Harvard Law School in the 1990s touted Warren, then a professor in Cambridge, as being “Native American.” They singled her out, Warren later acknowledged, because she had listed herself as a minority in an Association of American Law Schools directory.


          She lied.
          https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • gitarcarver says:

          That’s a white-wing myth. Didn’t happen.

          You are trying to make a distinction between what she said to get ahead and whether the groups / organizations / schools / universities used that claim.

          It’s a distinction that doesn’t exist, Jeffery. Whether people acted on the claim matters not one iota to whether she made the claim in order to get preferential treatment, which she did.

          Your talk of “Pocahontas” and “Fauxcahontas” is demeaning to them.

          It is so demeaning that the native American tribes are speaking out about her false claim and not the terms being used to describe the lying Warren.

          It is almost that the left has so much hate that they feel compelled to lie and speak for other groups.

          BTW – you are aware that Warren’s claims after her DNA test make her claim even more ridiculous, right? So why are you backing a known liar? Why the need to have some level of faux outrage over a liar?

          (That’s a rhetorical question because we all know that the answer is that all the left has is hate which is why you are doing it.)

          • Jethro says:

            she made the claim in order to get preferential treatment, which she did.

            Is there evidence that she did this for preferential treatment? Are you ascribing motives without knowledge?

            Have you ever been asked to put your ethnicity on a document? If you complied, was it to obtain preferential treatment, or was that you thought it was true?

            If Senator Warren had checked the box for Native American, fully believing her family lore, would you then concede she was acting ethically?

          • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

            If Senator Warren had checked the box for Native American,

             
            She did at Harvard while previously at the University of Texas she did not.
            After she gained tenure she removed the check.

            These well known facts are all available on line, little fella.
            You’re looking even more nignorant than usual today, little fella.
            https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

          • gitarcarver says:

            Is there evidence that she did this for preferential treatment?

            Yes. See below.

            Have you ever been asked to put your ethnicity on a document?

            Yes.

            If you complied, was it to obtain preferential treatment, or was that you thought it was true?

            I usually don’t check the boxes at all. Neither of that matters to the relevant fact that Warren was trying to get preferential treatment. It is your contention that Warren thought she was native American without meeting the legal standard for the claim? That she was making up definitions?

            If Senator Warren had checked the box for Native American, fully believing her family lore, would you then concede she was acting ethically?

            The “family lore” claim came in after she was questioned about the lie. Before that, she simply stated that she was even though she wasn’t. In your opinion, is it ethical to lie?

            Now that the evidence she provided has come out and shown her claims to be false, is it ethical for her to continue to lie?

          • Jethro says:

            See below.

            We’ll take that as a no. You have no evidence. Your opinions and fantasies are not evidence.

          • gitarcarver says:

            We’ll take that as a no. You have no evidence. Your opinions and fantasies are not evidence.

            See below is in reference to another poster who has already addressed your question.

            When Warren made the claim previously, Cherokee genealogists examined her claims back as far as they could (past the point where Warren claims the lineage occurs) and found nothing.

            Are you claiming that the Cherokee genealogists are lying?

            Warren is attacking Native Americans and you want to side with her?

            The Cherokee Nation has issued a statement rejecting Warren’s attempt to use DNA evidence to prove she’s Native American:

            “A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America,” Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin, Jr. said. “Sovereign tribal national set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.”

            So despite your deflection, there is real evidence out there that Warren lied. There is truth and it is not on your side and not on her side.

          • Jethro says:

            Again, no evidence, just supposition.

            There is much more evidence that DJ tRump lied about his inheritance, and yet you’re not bothered.
            There is much more evidence that DJ tRump lied about his campaign’s Russian connections, and yet you’re not bothered.
            There is much more evidence that DJ tRump lied about his paying off sex workers, and yet you’re not bothered.
            There is much more evidence that DJ tRump lied to his many wives about his infidelities, and yet you’re not bothered.
            There is much more evidence that DJ tRump lied about his taxes, and yet you’re not bothered.
            tRump U, Hispanics, women, Blacks, Muslims, Dems… he lies every day on issues large and small, and demonstrably.

            Yet you’re apoplectic about Senator Warren and you can’t even present evidence that she lied.

            And you wonder why Americans are through with the GOP.

          • gitarcarver says:

            Again, no evidence, just supposition.

            I am sorry that you cannot read what is in this thread. Are you having browser issues? Not seeing all of the thread? Or is it just willful ignorance?

            As for your list, we appreciate that you and others want to deflect away from the Warren issue.

            The left is often fond of screaming of “cultural appropriation.” In Warren, it sits in front of you and the left and all you can do is try to deflect and deny.

            The hate and hypocrisy is strong in the left.

        • formwiz says:

          No, the minority is American Indians, which is what they call themselves.

          Native Americans is as phony as all the gender bending.

    • Dana says:

      It’s important because the left support dividing people based upon racial classifications, and the lovely Dr Warren used a minority racial classification, to which she was not entitled, to improve her opportunities to get a particular job. This blue-eyed (dyed) blonde decided that she was an honest-to-goodness Cherokee, so she should use it as a leg up in the competition for professorships. That’s the kind of thing that happens when we have a policy as repugnant as Affirmative Action.

      And, of course, that hoitiest of the toitiest, Hahvahd University, touted her as the first ‘woman of color’ in her particular faculty, which begs the question: how many other blue-eyed (dyed) blonde white people are being pumped up as ‘persons of (not much) color’ when Hahvahd publishes the statistics of how incredibly ‘diverse’ the University is? We already know that the University discriminates against the oddly-eyed saffron-skinned.

      But maybe you just don’t get it: we mock Senatrix Warren because she is mockworthy, and because she is the walking, talking embodiment of all that is wrong with Affirmative Action, specifically, and leftist policies in general. Nothing works for the left unless it is based on lies!

      • Jethro says:

        Since Senator Warren did not use her suspected heritage to get a leg up, you’re complaint is with Harvard for listing her as a minority? Any benefits accrued to the fabulously wealthy school.

        Do you have even a shred of evidence that Senator Warren used her heritage in her academic appointments?

        A Harvard Crimson (student run) piece in 1996 described her as Native American.

        A 1997 Fordham Law Review (student run) piece described her as Harvard Law School’s “first woman of color,” based, according to the notes at the bottom of the story, on a “telephone interview with Michael Chmura, News Director, Harvard Law (Aug. 6, 1996).”

        More women (3 and counting) claim they were assaulted by Kavanaugh, than academic officials (0) who claim they were influenced by Senator Warren’s purported status. According to tRump, that “proves her innocence”.

        Senator Warren is progressive, reason enough for Con Men to attack her personally, rather than to debate her progressive ideas. Nothing new.

        • formwiz says:

          Well, we have the university’s need to fill a diversity slot.

          But keep on denying reality.

          It will help come November.

        • Dana says:

          Mr Bodine asked:

          Since Senator Warren did not use her suspected heritage to get a leg up, you’re complaint is with Harvard for listing her as a minority? Any benefits accrued to the fabulously wealthy school.

          It’s a lie, isn’t it? Whether Dr Warren personally benefited from her false claim or not is unknowable, because everybody denies it, but how do we know that there wasn’t some advantage she enjoyed from it?

          And Harvard is right there, falsifying its ‘diversity’ statistics, by having counted at least one lily-white woman as a colored person person of color. This is what you have when you have racially discriminatory policies like Affirmative Action; when advantage accrues to racial classifications, people and institutions are going to take advantage of them.

          Senator Warren is progressive, reason enough for Con Men to attack her personally, rather than to debate her progressive ideas.

          We don’t have to debate them; all that we have to do is point to Venezuela and North Korea, and what socialism in action has wrought.

    • formwiz says:

      Conservatives care because it shows her to be the liar she is.

      Trump keeps his promises. Big difference.

    • And why do Cons care so much

      It’s called “Politics”

      And, yes, she did use it for advantages.

  3. Jethro says:

    It’s a lot like Southern whites whose identity is white but show significant levels of African DNA. Their DNA doesn’t matter, since their identity is “white”.

    Would it change a “white” Con’s attitudes to find an African great-grandfather? And what are the implications related to the Con hypothesis that European DNA is superior to African DNA?

    No wonder Cons abhor science and facts.

    https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(14)00476-5

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      Non sequitur, little fella.
      Look it up.
      https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • Dana says:

      Mr Bodine wrote:

      No wonder Cons abhor science and facts.

      Says the man male who thinks that girls can be boys and boys can be girls in this mixed up, muddled up, shook up world. Conservatives seek truth, while liberals accept delusions.

      • Jethro says:

        Ms. Delaney doesn’t keep up with the latest research because like most Cons, she doesn’t like the answers. To you, what biologic traits clearly delineates male vs female? A dyed bouffant hairdo, a large mushroom shaped clitoris, pear-shaped (feminine) physique, make-up, manicures, no knowledge of the lost lore of a man’s life, still allows a person to describe themselves as a “man”.

        Cons seek truth. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

        Anyway, here’s just a sample of the complexity (from the World Health Organization):

        Aneuploidy is the condition of having less than (monosomy) or more than (polysomy) the normal diploid number of chromosomes. Divergence from the normal number of X and Y chromosomes, called sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA), accounts for approximately half of all chromosomal anomalies in humans with a total frequency of 1:400. Sex chromosome physical abnormalities are able to be diagnosed prenatally via amniocentesis and chorionic villi sampling (CVS). Prenatal diagnosis of SCA is increasing because of the widespread use of these technologies.

        The high frequency of individuals with SCA is due to the fact that their effects are generally not as severe as autosomal abnormalities and are rarely lethal.
        Indeed, most cases of SCA are compatible with normal life expectancy and often go undiagnosed. Still, it is estimated that 1 in 3 miscarriages is due to aneuploidy affecting the fetus.

        That’s a pretty high percentage of individuals with SCA.

        Here’s another – phenotypic women but 46XY (genotypic male):

        Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS) is an X-linked recessive disorder in which affected individuals have external female genitalia and breast development despite being genetically male (46XY). Tissues of affected individuals are unresponsive to male hormones (androgens) yet respond to estrogens.

        Wisniewski et al. assessed the physical and psychosexual status of 14 women with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS) by questionnaire as well as medical examination in order to determine the participants’ knowledge of their disorder as well as their opinion of medical and surgical treatment. Most of the women questioned expressed satisfaction with their psychosexual development and sexual function. All of the women who participated in the study were satisfied at having been raised as females, and none of the participants desired gender reassignment.

        and…

        Intersex is defined as a congenital anomaly of the reproductive and sexual system. An estimate about the birth prevalence of intersex is difficult to make because there are no concrete parameters to the definition of intersex. The Intersex Initiative, a North-American based organization, estimates that one in 2,000 children, or five children per day in the United States, are born visibly intersex. This estimate sits within range; from genital anomalies, such as hypospadias, with a birth prevalence of around 1:300 to complex genital anomalies in which sex assignment is difficult, with a birth prevalence of about 1:4500. Many intersex children have undergone medical intervention for health reasons as well as for sociological and ideological reasons. An important consideration with respect to sex assignment is the ethics of surgically altering the genitalia of intersex children to “normalize” them.

        A standardized intersex management strategy was developed by psychologists at Johns Hopkins University (USA) based on the idea that infants are gender neutral at birth. Minto et al. note that “the theory of psychosexual neutrality at birth has now been replaced by a model of complex interaction between prenatal and postnatal factors that lead to the development of gender and, later, sexual identity”.

        However, currently in the United States and many Western European countries, the most likely clinical recommendation to the parents of intersex infants is to raise them as females, often involving surgery to feminize the appearance of the genitalia.

        Minto et al. conducted a study aiming to assess the effects of feminizing intersex surgery on adult sexual function in individuals with ambiguous genitalia. As part of this study, they noted a number of ethical issues in relation to this surgery, including that:
        there is no evidence that feminizing genital surgery leads to improved psychosocial outcomes;
        feminizing genital surgery cannot guarantee that adult gender identity will develop as female; and that
        adult sexual function might be altered by removal of clitoral or phallic tissue.
        Developmental biology suggests that a strict belief in absolute sexual dimorphism is incorrect. Instead, Blackless et al. suggest two overlapping bell-shaped curves to conceptualize sexual variations across populations. Qualitative variation in chromosome complement, genital morphology and hormonal activity falls under the area of overlap. Such an opinion challenges the need for medical intervention in cases of intersexuality.

        Anyway, sex, gender, sexual identity are more complex than XX vs XY or penis vs clitoris.

        Why do you care so much what people think of themselves as they try to sort out their lives? Why are Cons compelled to ridicule what they refuse to even try to understand?

        http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/

        • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

          Anyway, sex, gender, sexual identity are more complex than XX vs XY or penis vs clitoris.

          Only if one is as delusional as a nignorant angry little black child in st. louis.
          https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • formwiz says:

          No, it’s the plumbing you got.

          The rest is all just mental illness. Which explains lot of your issues.

          And I wouldn’t trust the UN on anything.

          • Jethro says:

            Buttercup,

            It’s always fake news when it conflicts with Con “beliefs”.

            No, it’s the plumbing you got.

            Did you read the section on ‘intersex’ infants? In part:

            However, currently in the United States and many Western European countries, the most likely clinical recommendation to the parents of intersex infants is to raise them as females, often involving surgery to feminize the appearance of the genitalia.

            So for the over 1000 infants a year in the US alone, what if the “assignment” of sex by the physician is in error? What if the infant is incorrectly assigned as female while genetics, endocrinology, brain development all dictate she is a he?

            All are Cons dogmatic by nature? Are they incapable of thoughtfulness?

        • Dana says:

          Mr Bodine asked:

          To you, what biologic traits clearly delineates male vs female?

          XY vis a vis XX chromosomes, a penis vis a vis a clitoris, testicles vis a vis ovaries, simply the very basic biological differences between males and females, that everyone has known about since humans became self-aware.

          Are people different among themselves? Certainly! We have men who are tall versus men who are short, a varied range of shapes and skin colors, and even the demented (liberals) vis a vis those with common sense (conservatives), but even though birth defects — which is what you are talking about in your lengthy comment — exists, male and female are simply biological traits, and they are immutable.

          Anyway, sex, gender, sexual identity are more complex than XX vs XY or penis vs clitoris.

          No, they really are not. Every bird, every mammal, every reptile is able to distinguish between males and females of their own species, and some mammals — primarily domesticated pets — can even distinguish between males and females among humans. Only human liberals have managed to dumb themselves down so much that they have lost this basic, biological instinct; only human liberals have managed to stupefy themselves enough to decide that one persons delusions ought to command other people’s assent.

          Think back to your childhood; you could always tell, instantly, who was a boy and who as a girl. That’s instinctive, and when girls started dumping dresses for blue jeans and t-shirts, you could still always tell the difference between males and females. We could have everybody, male and female alike, dress in burkhas, and we’d still be able to tell male and female apart.

          Except, of course, for liberals; they’ve somehow managed to make themselves so f(ornicating) stupid that they’ve lost that ability.

      • formwiz says:

        Are you just linking a long article or do you have a point? I’m sure there are some whites with black forebears, although many more blacks with white ancestry.

        I’m also sure most whites would be less obsessed than our own little racist. Technically, if you buy into anthropology, we all have African ancestry, so it makes it a moot point.

    • Dana says:

      Mr Bodine wrote:

      It’s a lot like Southern whites whose identity is white but show significant levels of African DNA. Their DNA doesn’t matter, since their identity is “white”.

      That’s actually the case a lot of times; go back four or six generations, and there might be a slave in the genetic woodpile. But ignoring a minor glitch in the history when it doesn’t affect you is reality; pretending to be something you are not is delusion.

      I’m not the type to waste my money on these ancestry type genetic tests; I am who I am, today, based on how I’ve lived my life, not on what might be in my genetic history. Actually, I’m a direct descendant from one of the passengers on the Mayflower, but so what? It’s not like I ever knew the man, nor have any experiences even remotely resembling his.

    • It’s a lot like Southern whites whose identity is white but show significant levels of African DNA

      Warren has identified as a Native America with like 1/1024 dna showing she might possibly maybe have that link. She might have a case if she was like 20-25% NA. Or even if it showed 5-10% as DNA.

      • Jethro says:

        Senator Warren didn’t know what percentage at the time she “checked the box”, only her family history, or lore.

        Where is tRump supposed to send the $1 million?

        • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

          She lied and she got caught.
          Kinda like you, soldier.
          https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • formwiz says:

          Fauxcahontas didn’t think anyone would check.

          Nowhere. She doesn’t qualify as an Indian by the Cherokee nation’s standards, which is good enough for me.

        • Mangoldielocks says:

          Warren, who once maintained her family had “high cheekbones like all of the Indians do,” was listed as a “minority faculty member” by The University of Pennsylvania. She had the school switch her designation from white to Native American. Warren self-identified as a “minority” in the legal directory, and Harvard Law School preposterously listed her as one of the “women of color” the school had hired. On job applications, Warren was very specific in claiming that she had Cherokee and Delaware Indian ancestry.

          Survey: Diversity Lacking At HLS
          By Theresa J. Chung,
          October 22, 1996
          106
          A majority of Harvard Law School students are unhappy with the level of representation of women and minorities on the Law School faculty, according to a recent survey.

          The survey distributed last May by the Coalition for Civil Rights (CCR), reported that 83 percent of respondents believe the number of minority women on the Law School faculty is inadequate.

          Keep on defending the indefensible. She is straight up a LIAR. Pure and simple. The expert didnt even use AMERICAN INDIAN DNA in her test rather substituting south American DNA. The Cherokee nation has blasted her for claiming she was Cherokee. I mean really. You should take a day off and move on to something more defensible.

          • Jethro says:

            Native American DNA is not available.

            Again, any evidence that Senator Warren used her mistake for preferential treatment?

          • gitarcarver says:

            Native American DNA is not available.

            So Warren’s claim that DNA testing proved her claim that she is Native American must be a lie, right?

            Even the testing she had done was flawed Jeffery.

  4. Dana says:

    This is just more of the idiocy of the left, deciding that a person is what he says he is, actual facts be damned. If Senatrix Warren can be an Indian because she has somewhere between 1/64th and 1/1024th ‘native American’ ancestry, why then of course someone with 50% female genes (XY is 50% of XX after all) can claim to be a real, genuine despite a wispy beard, a ‘clitoris’ that’s six inches long and ovaries that have somehow descended into a scrotum.

    The left, who tell us that ‘the science is settled’ when it comes to global warming climate change sure can’t see the science as being settled when it comes to what humans, to what every mammal and bird and reptile, know about the distinctions between male and female.

  5. MrToad says:

    I can’t imagine anyone on the left thinks Warren is talented enough to dig herself out of this hole. Only the dumb ones are still trying to cover for Warren. She may have even blown it so badly that it affects her next senate race. Who wouldn’t bring up this gold mine?

  6. Jl says:

    Give Warren a break. After all, she’s an undocumented Indian…

  7. formwiz says:

    It’s always fake news when it conflicts with Con “beliefs”.

    Dr Freud would beg to differ.

    Native American DNA is not available.

    If there ever were “Native Americans”, they died out a long time ago. If you mean American Indians, we’re talking 2/3 Asian and 1/3 European, according to anthropologists.

    All are Cons dogmatic by nature?

    If you mean they go by the facts, yes.

    Are they incapable of thoughtfulness?

    Thoughtfulness has nothing to do with going along with idiotic lies. Hermaphrodites have been around forever. You act as if this is something brandy new.

  8. formwiz says:

    Jeffery thinks defending Fauxcahontas gives him kissy points with his Lefty masters.

    Oh, if he knew how mad his Lefty masters are at her for making an ass out of herself 2 weeks out from the elections.

    And giving in to someone’s mental aberration is not thoughtfulness. Thoughtfulness is telling them they need help.

  9. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    On the sex issue, that you are confused over. If you go to the program, Uptodate, you will find that the latest thought on transgender and others is that the suffer from delusions. The norm is still you are a male of you have a penis and female if you have the respective parts as well as each with the typical chromosomes. The poor folks who have an ambiguous situation are very rare and most often assigned their sex by the doctor and parents. If you feel that you are the opposite sex, you are sick and having delusions. Your pontificating and misguided opinions are worthless.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8819 access attempts in the last 7 days.